We recognize that there are lot of people out there writing interesting things that our audience might appreciate—some of it so interesting we wish we’d produced ourselves.
ICYMI is a new section we’ve started to focus on stories that appear elsewhere that draw attention to trends and issues that impact communications professionals; research that can inform and inspire PR people; and other interesting content that we think is relevant to the PRovoke Media audience.
Not for the first time, the people I follow on Bluesky have pointed me in the direction of a couple of interesting studies, each of which suggests ways in which scientists—and those working with them—can enhance the credibility of the scientific research they share with the public.
Given what we are seeing in terms of declining confidence in vaccine safety and efficacy, and recent coverage of the California wildfires that seemed to spend more time blaming DEI than climate change, it’s no secret that scientific credibility is in crisis, and scientists need more communications help than ever.
The first, I would suggest, is relatively intuitive: research conducted by Jonah Koetke and a team at the University of Pittsburgh found that “seeing scientists as higher in intellectual humility was associated with greater perceived trustworthiness of scientists and support for science-based beliefs.”
The team then tested communication approaches that scientists can use to convey intellectual humility. More than 1,700 participants read about fictional scientists working on topics such as climate change. According to coverage of the study in Nature, “These scientists were found to be more trustworthy when they were presented as being willing to admit their own knowledge gaps than when they were portrayed as being less intellectually humble.”
The second study may raise eyebrows, at least initially, because it found that AI-generated summaries of scientific studies “are not only simpler and more accessible to general readers but also improve public perceptions of scientists’ trustworthiness and credibility,” according to PsyPost, which reported on research by David Markowitz, an associate professor of communication at Michigan State University.
One reason for the difference, according to Markowitz, was the relative simplicity of the language in AI summaries: “Simple language feels better to most people than complex language and therefore I hope this work also suggests that people should demand more from scientists to make their work more approachable linguistically.
“Complex ideas do not necessarily need to be communicated in a complex manner.”
While the AI focus of the second study is interesting, the core message should resonate with human communicators: keep it simple. Professional public relations people really ought to be able to achieve the same results, with a far lower risk of hallucination.
The lesson from both studies: keep it simple and humble.
Image for this article generated by Microsoft Copilot
This post was originally published on here
